Cascading Surge-Protective Devices: Coordination versus the IEC 664 Staircase
François D. Martzloff National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg MD email@example.com
Jih-Sheng Lai Power Electronics Applications Center Knoxville TN
Paper presented at PQA'91 Conference, Gif-sur-Yvette, France, 1991
Significance Part 8 – Coordination of cascaded SPDs The early nineties were marked by the emergence of concerns about the coordination of cascaded SPD in the midst of “common wisdom” that voltage surges impinging upon the service entrance of a building would inherently become less severe as they propagate and divide among the branch circuit of the installation. That perception was reinforced by the publication in 1980 of an IEC Standard on insulation coordination that figured prominently a “staircase” of descending surge voltage levels. As a result of that perception, proposals were made to provide a service entrance SPD with a limiting voltage higher than the limiting voltage of the SPDs installed at the point-of-use receptacles. Numerical simulations and measurements on actual SPDs demonstrated the pitfalls of that perception. For an effective coordination to occur – service entrance SPD diverting the bulk of the surge current and point-of-use SPD mitigation as needed – the service entrance SPD cannot have a substantially higher limiting voltage than the point-ofuse SPD, lest the latter take on the bulk of the energy. The inductance of the wiring between the service entrance can add some voltage drop between the two devices, so that an acceptable degree of coordination can still be achieved if the two device have equal limiting voltages. The redeeming effect of the wiring inductance is of course dependent upon the waveform of the impinging current surge, as well as the length of the branch circuit. The relationships of these parameters are explored in the computations and experiments reported in the paper.
With the emergence of new types of arresters for service entrance duty and the recognition of waveforms with greater duration than the classic 8/20 FS impulse.t-. the device with high energy handling capability receives the largest part of the total energy involved in the surge event.yu.W.. combined with increased awareness of tine need
.F. Cette disposition permet d'assurer la3abiliti de la protection contre les transitoires d'origine exttrieure aussi bien que ceux produits par le rnattriel adjacent. depending upon the relative clamping voltages of the two devices. de distances stparant les dispositfs.~grgJ~~2drcs. a new situation arises that may invalidate the expectations on the cascade coordination scenario.t~. ~ez~~giye::. . et de la forme d'ottde postulte pour le transitoire.or at the euui~ment and com~lete the ~rotection. to achieve reliable protection of equipment against surges impinging fi-om the utility supply as well as internally generated surges.rC.-cLAing w o or . we will call the service entrance device 'arrester' and the downstream device 'suppressor'. 2 . coordination may or may not be effective. their separation distance.
Recent progress in the availability of surge-protective devices. are installed downstream near.. .ysc .
prompted the app!ication of 2 protection scheme.efiiiic? Abstract devices located rpsp~cti~-ely rr. surge-protective devices with lower energyhandling capability and lower clamping voltage than that of the service entrance.... .
Somiiiaire .e &.
---4 c. With a gap plus varistor element. and the waveform of the impinging surge. In this scheme. Cette communication donne les risultats de calculs. Maryianci 20899
Jih-Sheng Lai Power Electronics Applications Center Knoxville. Then.
-:--4 iiga~uar aulgoa. . The downstream uppressers were
. pour un ensemble de niveaux d'icri?tage relatifs.Cascading Surge-Protective Devices: Coordination versus the IEC 664 Staircase Montage en cascade de parafoudres: Coordination ou gradins IEC 664 ?
Fran~ois D .
To make the distinction between these two devices.jjulurr
on. Martzloff National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg. Tennessee 37932
cc. the service entrance arrester could easily be designed with a 175-V Maximum Continuous Operating Voltage (MCOV) in a 120-V (rms) system.
millti-ct~n . &Iii sefie*'. Such a scheme i s described as 'coordinated' if.f yawsPP"'. as well as on the consensus concerning the waveform and current levels of representative lightning surges impinging on a building service entrance. Service entrance arresters were generally based on the combination of a gap with a nonlinear varistor element. con)rmts par des mesures.f the service e!!trrr!!cec>f a building and near the sensitive equipment is intended to ensure that each device shares the surge stress in an manner commensurate with its rating. a high-energy surgeprotective device is installed at the service entrance of a building to divert the major part of the surge energy. Ihe paper reports computations confirmed by measurements of the energy deposited in the devices for combinations of these three parameters. indeed. the classic surge arrester design before the advent of metal-oxide varistors (MOV) that made gapless arresters possible. . .[ : ciii voisinage du martriel ri prortger est envisqt d m s IP hu! d'rrrsurer que chaque dispositifprenne une part de la contrainte totale associte au transitoire qui corresponde bien ci la valeur norninale de chacun. !'o.---r r a c r a A m
h i ~
This scenario was initially based on the technology of secondary surge arresters prevailing In the 1970s and early 1980s.i e morrircge ell cascade de piusieurs .%ore siirgc-pi-o.. However.
with the necessary experimental validation. by means of the natural attenuation caused by the multiple branch circuits.. the usual practice is to rate these devices for the line-to-line voltage in order to provide for the case of one comer of the delta being at ground. That concept was based on recognition that the wiring inductance would decrease the available surge current at locations deeper into the building . A ... .!aqir?g !eve!. a new situation has been created. The Maximum Continuous Operating Voltage of the arrester will deternine its r. For threephase systems in which devices are connected between phases and ground (protective earth).41-1980 Guide  (updated as a Recommended Practice in 1991) defined a set of 'Location Categories' within a building.
Figure 1 Installation Categories according to !EC P i k 664-1983 [31
On the other hand. three-wire service connection. This concept was in complete harmony with the 'Installation Category' concept of IEC Pub 664-1980  which featured a descending staircase of voltages. according to IEC 664. a disagreement has emerged among the recommendations for coordinated cascade schemes: the 1970-1980 perception and Ref suggesting a 'High-Low' and the new 'Low-High' suggestion of Refs  and . The lower levels would be achieved.F rL. a & "I ILL= ~ U I ~ E : is diverted by the arrester.a surge-protective device. with several lower levels within the building (Figure 1). Thereafter. driven by the perception that sensitive equipment requires a low protective level [I]. For the new waveforms proposed in C62.for the 8/20 ps current waveform then universally postulated to be representative. during the tail of the surge. but the current levels decrease. Th_us. During the ascending portion of a relatively steep surge such as the 8/20 ps. and will serve as input to the surge protective device application guides now under development by providing a reconciliation of the apparent disagreement. Thus. the ANSIIIEEE C62. this situation occurs for the 10/1000 ps where the tail contains most of the energy. This paper reports the results of modeling the situation created by the emergence of gapless arresters and longer waveforms. The scheme can work if there is a series impedance (mostly inductance) between the arrester and the suppressor. away from the service entrance. becomes high enough to sparkover the arrester gap. relieving the suppressor from the heavy duty 121. 'p:-L l I g L I -T Lu -. the lower discharge voltage of ihe arrester (made possibie by the gap) ensures that the . which is actually rooted in different premises on the coordination parameters. will divert the current.--. [ 8 ! . gapless arresters. there will be a tendency to protect them with the lowest possible clamping voltage. the inductive drop may still be sufficient to develop enough voltage across the terminals of the arrester and force it to absorb much of the impinging energy. if singlephase equipment.IK. added to the clamping voltage of the suppressor. Meanwhile. An alternate means has been proposed 'hw-Eigh' where the arrester c ! m p i ~ g ve!tage is !aver than that of the suppressor [ 7 ] .L~Y . that is.. -.. starting with the 'uncontrolled situation' at the building service entrance. SO= nti!ities wish !G ensure survival of the arrester under the condition of a lost neutral.
.' W This sibatim sets the stage h i combination where the arrester c!amping vr?!tage is higher than that of the suppressor [51. . constant voltage levels are maintained downstream of the service entrance. the inductive drop is now negative and thus the suppressor with lower voltage. However.
The new situation
With the emergence of MOV-based. twice the normal voltage for a single-phase.41-199 1 . because the inductive drop in the series impedance.7 to 2 times the single-phase voltage. or by a deliberate interface . typical of home electronic systems ('domotique' in French) are perceived to be sensitive. This survival wish is a motivation for selecting an arrester clamping voltage corresponding to 1.-. the situation is reversed. According to that concept. not the arrester.F. and the relief provided by the arrester might not last past the front part of the surge. These results cover a range of parameters to define the limits of a valid cascade coordination.
selected with a low level. the stage was set for a mind-set of decreasing surge energy as the wiring progresses through the building. or the case of undefined voltage between neutral and ground.
results (presented below) show that for the 250-150 combination. I = k V . 'Low-High' becoming in reality 'High-Low'. The parameter k and exponent a can be obtained from fitting the data in the linear log-log region. Thus. The arrester and the varistor are separated by a distance d determined by the specific installation.MOV Circuit Modeling
The current-voltage (I-V) characteristic of a MOV has O L long been represented by a power law.
. In fact. Figure 2 shows the maximum clamping voltage levels. as 130 x 1.Location Categoly B
Location Category A
Figure 3 Configuration of a two-stage cascade
. a device at the low end of the tolerance band would have a characteristic 20% lower than the data book characteristics. Note the remarkable fit achieved by this model over the range of interest.9 = 135. Using (1): the MOV circuit model can then be simply represented by a voltagedependent current source. the simulation computations were performed for all three devices at their nominal values. The exponential term is added to cover the voltages higher than a threshold voltage Vo where the upturn begins and can be obtained h m ftting the I-V chz~?.Istics i:: !he higher current (voltage) region. the two closely rated cascaded devices (130 V and 150 V) could in some extreme cases become inverted in the sequence. and 420 V for a 'high'. 320 V for a 'medium'. i..
There is a tolerance of +_ 10% on the actual values within a given varistor rating. the difference is so large that a low-end 250 (225 V) combined with a high-end 150 (165 V) would not make an appreciable difference in the energy sharing. similar ratings would be 250 V for a 'low'.
. the marked points are the data directly read
from curves in the MOV data book. 1=
Peak Currenl (A)
. This equation is only applicable in a certain ve!kgp (ccrre2t) rwxg:: in wbdCh the I-V charac&i.! :(V . and are given in Table 1 for units in volts and amperes. Fnr !he high-current region of the characteristic. The exponent a in this model is a function of the MOV voltage rating. A modified I-V characteristic is proposed here as expressed in (1).
Table 1 Curve fitting results for three 20-mm dia M O V s
I < IVOCV)
( 4 . e. Model parameters in (1) can be obtained from the MOV data book and verified by experiments. 0 * 1 0 . Table 1 lists the curve fitting data for the equivalent circuit parameters of three MOVs typical of what might be considered for a 120-V power system: 130 V for 'low'.05118*10-~1 320
i / I
In Figure 2.
Simulation of Cascaded Devices in a Low-Voltage System
Figure 3 shows a typical two-stage cascade surge protection. using the parameters listed in Table 1. the current increment rate starts dropping.functionsof the voltage rating and the size.Vo) [A . Furthermore. For European systems with a 220-V single-phase voltage.V0)l
Figure 2 M O V characteristics obtained from modeling results
The coefficients in (1) can be obtained from a curve fitting technique by minimum-error-norm [lo] using a MOV data book  or experimental results.~ ~30 (
10. This change appears on the I-V plot as a voltage upturn in the high-current region. with appropriate modification of the parameters in the model equation. while the three linesare a plot of the computed I-V characteristic &cording to (I). and 250 V for 'high'.~teT. The threshold voltage Vo and coefficients X and ( are . 150 V for 'medium'.(V .1 = 143 and 150 x 0. Note that the numerical values of the parameters are unitdependent.ls:ic presents a linear relationship in a !og-!ng p!nt.
representative of U. For three device voltage levels. V1 and V2 across the arrester and suppressor respectively.8/20 ps Combination Wave.130 V cascade. 1 0 m separation. but is not reported here because the low energy stress involved in that waveform will not deposit substantial energy in the rippressor or the arrester.) wire. so that the resistance of the wire could be neglected. the energy deposited in the arrester and the suppressor were calculated as 29. practice for 20 A branch circuits. 10 m. 8/20 /IS surge
. consists of a surge source IG. given the flexibility of the model. where it is the iotai current injected into the cacade b j the surge souice of the il is the arrester current. 8 / 2 0 ps applied surge
3 ( 3
Figure 7 Simulated dissi~ated Dower for 250 V .
( I ll
130 V 250 V 150 V
Figure 5 Simulated current responses for 2 5 0 V . and nine cascade combinations. The case of the 100 kHz Ring Wave was also simulated and tested 1121.6 J respectively. two waveforms. consider a cascade with 250 V and 130 V devices separated by 10 m. m sedaration. However. and 40 m were used in the simulation. i0 .7 J and 8.83-rnm dia. a total of 72 cases are reported here. 8 / 2 0 ps applied surge
Two standard waves from Ref  were chosen: the 1. The simulation results of the currents flowing in the two devices are shown in Figure 5. it was inciuded. 5 m. there is a total of nine possible cascade combinations as shown in Table 2. inductance is the dominant parameter and the wire diameter plays only a minor role [ll]. Figure 6 shows the corresponding device clamping voltages.1 3 0 V cascade. 10 m separation. For four distances. and the 10/1000 ps Impulse Wave.
Figure 6 Simulated voltage responses for 2 5 0 V .S. I2 is the S E ~ ~ T P U S S C : c~r:ent. The complete simulation model.8/20 Wave As one example of the combinations that were simulated.1 3 0 V cascade. shown in Figure 4. two voltage-dependent current sources IA and IS. At the frequencies involved in the surges considered. 20 m. and a line impedance between the two current sources.2150 ps .
Table 2 Nine cascade combinations for three devices
Simulation and Experimental Results .Four different d values. By integrating the instantaneous power. respectively for the arrester and the suppressor. Figure 7 shows instantaneous powers PI and P2. with a #12 AWG (1.
typical of the sensitivity of nonlinear circuits to minute changes in the applied voltage. with 10 m of separation. and Low (150 V) devices as arrester and suppressor.Table 3 lists the computed results for the 8/20 Wave simulation. consequently.3 kA instead of 3 kA in the simulation) was produced. the 150-V voltage suppressor also receives much less energy than the 130-V arrester. the higher voltage suppressor receives a:mosi zeio energy. voltage and power in the two devices.8 J in the arrester and 11. This result explains how the High-Low configuration can achieve a good coordination with the 8/20 Wave. where the subscript 1 corresponds to the arrester and the subscript 2 to the suppressor. Table 3 Energy deposition in the cascaded devices with a 3-kA 8120 Wave a s the surge source. In Table 3. where the lines represent the energy deposited in the suppressor as percentage of the total surge energy. the curves are approximately straight lines over the range.7 J and 9. a satisfactory agreement. 250 V and 130 V. prorating the simulation results (from Figure 7) to 3. the waveforms obtained from the experiment are not exactly the same as the simulated waveforms. (L! ratings. provided that there be sufficient distance between the two devices. For the High-Low condition.
H-M H-L \
\\ \ \
\. With the scale used in the figure (geometric distance).and the low clamping voltage of the suppressor reduces the voltage across the arrester. This decrease occurs because the line inductance does not provide enough voltage drop (L di/dt). The goal was to produce a 3 kA impinging surge (I1 + IZ). the power distribution between the two devices shows good agreement between the simulation and the experiment. was injected with a surge produced by a Combination Wave generator.
. The energy deposited in each device was computed by integration of the power (performed by the oscilloscope): 33.1 J in the suppressor: To compare simulation and measurement. as a functiny! ~f separation distance For Low-High configurations such as 150-250 and 130-250 cases. The surge generator delivers an approximation of the standard waveform. Oscillograrns were recorded for the current.3 kA would yield 32.1 5 0 V (M). and thus reduces the energy deposition level. as stated in Ref [S]. so that offering it diversion through a device with higher clamping voltage results in higher energy deposition. the energy deposition in the suppressor decreases rapidly when the separation distance increases. With closely rated devices (130-150). This situation can be explained by the fact that the impinging surge is defined as a current source. the total energy deposition decreases when the distance is reduced. but a slightly higher current (3. Now turning to measurements. When the distance between twn devices Is E~IICPL!.5 j rcspeciiveiy. However.130 V with 10-m separation (Figure 3). !he energy deposition tends to increase in the suppressor and decrease in the arrester. because the suppressor tends to lower the voltage across the arrester. the same cascade configuration. for 250-150 and 250-130 combinations. as energy deposition in the arrester (A) and suppressor (S) for all the combinations of different High (250 V). However.L-L
1 Rating of I
Energy deposited in each device (joules) as a function of separating distance (meters)
M-H LH I I I 5 10 20 40 DISTANCE BETWEEN ARRESTER AND SUPPRESSOR (m)
Figure 8 Relative energy deposited by an 8 / 2 0 ps Wave in t h e suppressor for arrester-suppressor or 1 3 0 V combinations of 2 5 0 V (HI. Medium (150 V). Tine use of the suppressor is near redundant in this case. 250 V . The total energy deposition in the two devices also varies with the distance for the High-Low configuration. Figure 9 shows the experimental results obtained with a cascade of two devices.
Figure 8 shows in graphic form the results of Table 3. as a function of relative clamping voltages and separation distance. the total energy deposition for the 250-250 combination is near constant at 103 J for different distances. except for its application to mitigate internally generated surges.
0 . 2
0. The low-voltage suppressor absorbs all the impinging energy in this High-Low configuration. 4
0 . 4
1 . 1011 000 ps surge
Compared to the 8/20 Wave. which is almost invisible in the computer-generated plot of Figure 10. the 1011000 Wave has a slower and longer drooping tail that contains most of the surge energy. ? 0 / ? 000 i.
0. 1 0 m separation. 0
0 . Thus. is also a small pulse that appears at the rising period as shown in Figure 12. s . 8
1 .rl? separatlen. 8
Figure 11 Simulated voltage responses for 2 5 0 V .1. the High-Low configuration cannot be coordinated as the high-voltage arrester will not absorb any impinging energy.2
0 . 8
0. 11 and 12 show the computed current. PI. !C ! .
+ 12: 1000 Aldiv
0 . During the long tail period. 6
0 .130 v
cascade.1 3 0 V cascade.s sijigs
Figure 9 Experimental results for t h e 2 5 0 V-130 V. ? 0 m separation. 4
1 . 8
1 . surge
.1 3 0 V cascade. and power for the arrester and for the suppressor under a High-Low (250-130) simu!ation h i a 2%-A p ~ surge k ciiiieiii.8
Figure 1 2 Simulated dissipated power for 2 5 0 V . !0/! 000 . defeating the intended coordination. 8
12: 1000 Aldiv
Figure 1 0 Sirnuiated current responses for 250 v . 4
1 . 10-m apart cascade condition. 4
0. + 12: 1000 Aldiv I l : 1000 Aldiv
The high-voltage arrester clamps the voltage during the impulse rising period and draws a small amount of the current pulse. 6
0 . 11. Figures 10. but the suppressor does. The power dissipated in the arrester. the inductive voltage drop between the arrester and the suppressor is low.2
0 . and the voltage appearing across the arrester is reduced by the effect of the suppressor even with long distances between the two devices. 8
1 . voltage.
and thus the energy is diverted to the device having the lower clamping voltage of the pair. 10-m apart cascaded cmditien with !0!!000 Wave. deposi$on in :f. not a very good coordination. 1 0 / 1 0 0 0 Wave as the surge source.
It can be seen from Table 4 that the low-voltage device always absorbs higher energy than the high-voltage device.
1 Rating I
Energy deposited in each device (joules) as a function of seoaratina distance (meters)
?l?e experiment. (L)iaiiiigs. as a tinction of separation distance
Figure 14 Experimental results for a 1 3 0 V . in the case of 5-m separation.
iabie 4 Energ.e eascadeS devices a 220-A.Table 4 lists the simulated energy deposition in the cascaded devices for different High-Low and Low-High combinations and for different distances. This figure shows an example of good coordination by Low-Medium. it is possible that the relative tolerances might in fact produce a situation which would not achieve good coordination: for instance. This situation exists because the voltage across the high-voltage device is clamped to the same level as that of the low-voltage device. f x a Low-Medium configuration is shown in Figure 14 where I. This shift would impose a 70-J duty to the suppressor and only 7 J to the arrester.
. Note that with two devices of equal nominal value. or Low-Medium. Medium-High.! respesse ts a ! O ! ! W Wave. 150-150. Equally rated devices (250-250. where most of the surge energy is absorbed by the low-voltage arrester. 1 5 0 V (MI. as a function of relative clamping voltages and separation distance.1 5 0 V.one of the goals of the two-step coordinated approach. and little surge current propagates into the building . Unlike the case of the 8/20 Wave.. coordination for the 10/1000 Wave can only be achieved by Low-High. but random tolerance levels. and 130-130) result in 50 % of the surge energy being deposited in the suppressor. The arrester voltage V1 is almost the same as the suppressor voltage V2 with a slight difference at the beginning of the surge. Figure 13 presents in graphic form the results of Table 4.
DISTANCE BETWEEN ARRESTER AND SUPPRESSOR (m) Figure 13 Relative energy deposited by a 1011000 p s Wave in the suppressor for arrester-suppressor or 1 3 0 V combinations of 2 5 0 V (H). an effective 150-130 combination can result from tolerance shifts in an intended 150-150 or 130-130 pair. and I? are the currents flowing in the 130-V arrester aid the-150-V suppressor respectively. with lines showing the energy deposited in the suppressor as percentage of the total surge energy.
1. Coordination of cascaded devices can be achieved under various combinations of parameters.I Ivlwgr. On the Propagation of Old and
New Surges.. This uncontrolled situation presents a challenge and obligation for standards-writing groups to address the problem and develop consensus on a trade-off of advantages and disadvantages of High-Low versus Low-High. IEEE Transactions PAS-99.. Coordination of Surge Suppressors in Low-Voltage AC Power Circuits.. October 1991.. Coordinating Cascaded Surge-Protective Devices. D. IEC Publication 664-1980 Insulation coordination within !ow-vo!hge s y s t p ~ s . 1991 Ziirich EMC Syfipsium.D.v. and Martzloff. Thus. T. Proceedings.. Coordination of Surge Protectors in Low-Voltage AC Power Circuits. IEC 64lWG3 138A. including a service entrance arrester and one or more plug-in devices to be installed for the dedicated protection of sensitive appliances. R. B.  Lai. Selecting Varistor Clamping Voltage: Lower Is Not Better! Proceedings.. IEEE C62. Earrib Carpi 1991. Proceedings. even such an engineered. IEEEIIAS Annual Meeting...
On the other hand. F. Explanation of interfaces for overvoltage categories . coordinated arrangement could be defeated by the addition of a suppressor with a very low clamping voltage. pp 19-28. Coupling. Significant parameters in achieving successful coordination involve three factors. not an insignificant likelihood in view of the present competition for lower clamping voibges. while a coordinated scheme would provide additional benefits and eliminate side-effects. Coordination of Surge Arresters and Suppressors for Use on Low-Voltage Mains. Massachusetts. not a standard waveform.:--.n--.
Martzloff. the determination of a successful coordination depends for the moment on the perception of what the prevailing highenergy waveforms can be for specific environments. 1984.?: of :he preinises.Supplement to Appendix B of Report 664. However. 2. Standler. while several smaller devices within the premises can perform local suppression. F.41-199 1 141 recommends considering these long waves as an additional. 1991. F.D. Reading.nes b in Low-Voltage AC Power Circuits. Coordinated schemes can be proposed by utilities to their customers. T~. This arrangement avoids !he flow nf !xge surge currmh k the branch circuits of the installation. IEEE Transactions IA-26. the situation exists where millions of small suppressors have been installed within equipment or as plug-in devices. S L ~ ~ .+ . JanuaryIFebruary 1980. I + ~ . Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. but some combinations will result in having a suppressor with low energy-handling capability called upon to divert the largest part of the surge energy.-. D. Stringfellow. F.
Some utilities wish to provide a service-entrance arrester capable of withstanding the 240-V overvoltage that can occur on the 120-V branches when the neutral is lost. IEEE Recommended Practice on Surge Voltages in Low-Voltage AC Power Circuits (To be published September 1991). over which the occupant of the premises has no control: the relative clamping voltages of the two devices.. This proviso provides an incentive for obtaining better statistics on the occurrence of long waves. Open Forum on Surge Protection Application.~-.. F.. and as long as long waves such as the 1011OOO p i are not occumng with high peak values. M. IEEE Guide nn Ssrge Vo!t. Prncedings.S.. and Stonely.a. and wperimenb! mearurezents shew that the ~bjective of coordination could still be achieved with a 250-130 combination.~. VU I IG V I L G ~ . G. Proceedings. 193-203. November 1990. it is evidently possible to obtain protection with suppressors alone. This uncoordinated situation can create adverse side effects when high current surges occur.inc!nding c!earmces and creepage distances for equipment.
[ll] Martzloff. ANSIIIEEE C62. 1989 Ziirich EMC Symposium. B.  Martzloff.41-1991.
The benefit from a coordinated approach is to allow a single device at the service entrance to perform the high-energy duty. pp 129-133. and the prevailing waveforms for impinging surges. with only sporadic and anecdotal reports of problems. Linear and Nonlinear Programming. their separation distance. IEEE C62.
3.. This desire will force the coordination scheme into a High-Low situation because of the uncontrolled installation of low clamping voltage suppressors by the resiiiu of the simuiation occupr.. F. and Leedy. T. pp.~. a situation known to produce undesirable side effects . D. Propagation. Martzloff.41-1980. J. MarchlApril i nnn rryv. F.-J D . as long as some distance is provided between the two devices. and Side Effects of Surges in an Industrial Building Wiring System. Thus. D.. June 1991. Open Forum on Surge Protection Application.